Back to Article

  • duploxxx - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    You mention that 6550D is a good first step to counter the intel GPU HTPC market, I would turn it around.... provide any reason why there would be a need for any Intel HTPC without additional graphics with Liano released?

    Liano Display Quality and performance HTPC wise is better
    Liano total cost is lower, at least when you take the right board for it. (not like the asrock extreme review bold compare max vs low)
    Liano can actually play a game, can't on the Intel parts for any decent level and quality
    Liano will consume less power on idle, htpc use
    the boards have standard better features.

    anything left? oh yes unfortunate... its not an Intel branded logo...
    Quicksync is a marketing part just like the amd smooth
  • L. - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Clearly, the opinion in the last AT reviews about the Liano is biased, and it's a pity.
    Good thing AT is not the only website that reviewed it, shows just how much of a threat this is for Intel.

    Fact of the matter is you can build your HTPC with just a Liano for cheaper, it does better and consumes less.

    Yes Liano is not half as good as it should be, but that's still much better than the Intel alternative, no matter how much you attempt to downplay the GPU part of this APU.

    Either way, platform costs will always make AMD a better option, the cheapest P67 mobo is around 100 euros, the first Liano mobos are 100 bucks, with a good price drop coming as usual.
  • cacca - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    I second your analysis, here is getting ridiculous.

    They even split the review to not close their analysis saying that as a generalist solution llano is the best for buck for medium/low market.
  • prdola0 - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Sorry but this back-patting squad seems like the AMD PR department on a posting spree.

    If AMD wanted to make waves, they shouldn't come with a half-done product. For gaming, the best Llano APU is barely able to play some new games at minimum details. Great. But that is only the top product. All the other Llanos are just going to be worse. Did you miss that?

    For the $30-$40 you can save on the expensive memory needed for Llano to get a half-decent gaming result, you could just invest into a low-end discrete GPU (AMD or NVIDIA, i don't care) and Intel i3-2100 and you get a more powerful CPU, better graphics power- and quality-wise and the ability to actually upgrade the GPU and CPU parts independently, should such a need arise.

    Please AMD PR, stop throwing your paid posters at every review that is just and fair - even if unfavourable to your product. Thanks.
  • cacca - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    i think you have a reading comprehension problem.

    Llano is for medium/low market and if you go around you will see that it can run at medium settings with dX11 a lot of games and even some of the new.

    HD3000 can't run DX11 and not even at medium setting. That the reasono for the other review using not even AntiAliasing and/or super crappy quality/resolutions

    Is not problem of PR marketing or not.

    If i want a high market PC i would go intel 2500k/2600K overclock it and buy a 6950 mod to 6970 and overclock. Because INTEL has the best top processor.

    But at medium/low market for the same money Llano just puts a big torn in the ass to i3 and other half assed intel GPU. Are really 2 different worlds.

    If Intel halves the prices for motherboards and i3s they would get back the crown as system but not as single jack of all trades chip.
  • prdola0 - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    It is really a simple, elementary school type, equation. You save some money when you buy a i3-2100 instead of A8. You save some money by going for just DDR3-1333, which is enough for the i3, instead of DDR3-1600 or even DDR3-1866, that are needed in order to get decent performance. Buy a low end GPU with that saved money, and you get better CPU power, better HTPC video quality, possibly better gaming framerates and the ability to upgrade the parts separately.

    It can't be simpler. You may even buy an Athlon II X4 instead of the APU for pretty much the same effect with more money to spend on the GPU. I don't care about the brands.

    Llano is only half-done and your AMD PR relation is too obvious. The rhetoric is too similar on most of the review sites. And most of the sites stated that Llano is far from expectations (on the desktop side, mobile is decent).
  • silverblue - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Here's what I expected:

    1) Llano's GPU would be bandwidth constrained and faster RAM would help ease these issues.
    2) Llano's GPU would approach DDR3 HD 5570 performance. It may not surpass it, but we're talking relatively close.

    In terms of its gaming performance, Llano has turned out pretty much as I expected. I can't be the only one to have this opinion.
  • duploxxx - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    I suggest you read again what you posted....

    HTPC Quality is better on Liano vs

    Mobo Price is lower for liano when you compare the same type of mobo, not the cheapest intel and the most expensive AMD like anandtech did. SO total price is already lower from the start not to mention the additional gpu cost and power consumption.

    you don't need 1866, 1600 has shown to be more then adequate and actually you can just use 1333 for HTPC only. Price of 1333-1600 is equal btw...

    Features are better on AMD chipsets

    Liano is able to play at least games on the same CPU, Intel not

    you can always add a gpu on liano, even a cheaper one in cf will do better.
    Performance idle and playback is lower then Intel
  • cyrusfox - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Agreed, Super BIAS!

    Ganesh that whole bit about Intel getting the GPU on die quicker than AMD didn't mean anything for Intel as the GPU was very very weak. Even now on SB its still at the bottom of the discrete pile. Its also why Brazos is creaming atom and the only reason the ion market ever took off.

    Llano/Lynx is a great value proposition, you get AMD's superior GPU drivers and a bumped up Phenom ii performanc. With the A75 Chipset you also are getting usb3, when is Intel going to make that standard, 2012? Sure Intel has the fastest CPU's on the market, even in this price range. AMD 32nm is on the market! Can you imagine the impact fusion will have especially when it is this cheap.
  • mino - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Just FYI, Clarkdale did NOT have a GPU on-die.

    It was a MCM - essentially a northbridge & CPU put on the same package.
  • ganeshts - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    For casual HTPC users (or even non-HTPC .. just users who want to play back HD video), there was no need for a discrete HTPC GPU starting with the Clarkdales / Arrandales (some would say even with the IGP in the 4500, but let us not talk about that because it was a pain to use).

    Hey, it looks like AMD's latest GPUs are not even able to decode videos that SNB / Clarkdale has no trouble with! (agreed it is a driver issue, but when are they going to fix it? We reported it 6 months back)

    Agreed about Intel's GPU very weak, but only for gaming. And for videos, the only place 6550D stands out is in deinterlacing quality (most people are OK with proper playback of progressive content).

    Atom deserves to get creamed in any way it can. But, I don't ever suggest people buy Atom based products (and I still advise friends to avoid anything with that level of performance, which includes Brazos) -- though market might not agree with me here. ION market no longer exists.

    The other propositions, I agree with. In this piece, I restricted myself to HTPC performance.
  • cyrusfox - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    I can respect and agree with your response, it just originally seemed to me that you were trumping Intel unfairly in regards to GPU integration efforts. But strictly in regards to video consumption in an HTPC, I can't fault your analysis, my apologies.

    As for AMD and its drivers, it can take awhile for them to get all the issues right(many times I have to opt for a hotfix release to fix one issue only to create another). But I have a little more faith in AMD releasing a driver update that corrects its issues than Intel. Then again you will be testing to see if you can achieve 23.976 Hz on SB with a new driver in the works, maybe Intel is stepping up there GPU driver game. Shoot, maybe Intel will even get the linux community sorted(we can hope!)
  • prdola0 - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    "HTPC Quality is better on Liano vs"

    What? You didn't even finish that sentence. HTPC Quality is better on i3-2100 + proper dGPU than on Llano.

    Then you throw at us some opinions totally unsupported by facts.

    "Features are better on AMD chipsets"

    Again, just an opinion and a flawed one. How are AMD chipsets better than Intel chipsets? You can't just say that without telling us what is better on AMD side or missing on Intel's. I can't really find anything.

    "Performance idle and playback is lower then Intel "
    No. The former is true, but the latter is a lie. In the main review Llano won just one power consumption test and lost the other four.

    Instead of accusing a quality review of bias without any facts to support it, just go away already.
  • StormyParis - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    The tests in the article seem to find video playback quality better on Llano. And much better for games.

    Superior features on the AMD chipset: USB 3, more SATA2 ports, typically better sound chip than on H61 boards (that's an OEM choice though, I just couldn't fnd an H61 board with ALC 892.. I didn't look much).

    Indeed lower idle power, higher under load.
  • maroon1 - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    What is the cheapest motherboard for Llano ?

    H61 motherboards can be found for $60 and H67 can found for only $75 in newegg

    Is there any Llano motherboard that cost same in newegg ?
  • StormyParis - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    give it a bit of time ? Reply
  • just4U - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    I've found the past few years that AMD boards are higher quality with more features then their Intel counterparts in similiar price ranges. I think it has to do with Intel charging more for their chipset maybe.. (a guess). AT could easily confirm this observation I think since they must have noticed the same thing. Reply
  • just4U - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    as an afterthought..

    Outside of OEM you really don't see bare bones Amd Boards like you do for Intel $60 boards. They'd have to sell them for 35-40 bucks and margins would be so low it's just not worth it. So they add more to bump the cost up (and appeal) making AMD's rock bottom boards equivelent to Intels $100 offerings.
  • T2k - Saturday, July 02, 2011 - link


    you are surely retarded, I must say - which part you STILL cannot grasp?

    For HTPC Llano is better EVERY WAY when compared to Intel's shitty Sandy Bridge solution and still scores better when compared to your Intel + VGA setup, first and foremost thanks to much lower power consumption which is one of the primary considerations when building an HTPC.
  • L. - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Mhhh no.
    Any other APU with the same GFX will do the same, I have no data about the others, but seeing how much this is memory constrained I would expect scaling to be non-linear in favor of the worse igp's.

    You will save slightly less than 30 bucks on the memory if you really want to buy 1333 today.
    You will also save only 30 bucks if you go for 2133mhz ram, with which the Llano performs much better, as shown in other reviews.

    4Gigs of 1333 (dual) : $33.99
    4Gigs of 1600(dual): $37.99
    4Gigs of 1866(dual): $59.99
    4Gigs of 2133(dual): $64.99

    Your I3+mobo already costs 20 bucks more than the Llano+mobo.

    i3 : $124.99
    cheapest p67 : $104.99
    Total : 230

    Llano A8 : $135 (announced)
    cheapest Llano mb : $70 (announced)
    Total 205

    Well .. I guess you could consider having a $5 rebate on your discrete GPU a total win in favor of i3 ...

    Need real numbers ? Go check newegg it's not my job ;)

    So in effect you are telling me that a more expensive system will be better... I do trust you on that ;)
  • prdola0 - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Typical PR stuff. Just as expected. There are cheaper SB-capable boards than that, also with cheaper chipsets.

    But nice try.
  • I hate State - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Not that I completely disagree with what you said, but why wouldn't you use an H61 board for an HTPC. H61's cost around 70 bucks and you can just tack on a graphics card. Though built in 23.975FPS is nice, I'll be waiting for either Ivy Bridge (if it has the correct playback) or the next generation of Lynx where processing power is up to snuff and hopefully better power draw figures for my next HTPC. Reply
  • Broheim - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    45.99$ for the cheapest H67 on newegg...

    H61 goes down to 31.99$

    where's your god now?
  • MrTeal - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Got a link to that $31.99 H61 mobo? I can't find it on newegg. Reply
  • Broheim - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link Reply
  • blunt14468 - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    OPEN BOX Reply
  • prdola0 - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    59$ a brand new one. Still the same point. You? Reply
  • maroon1 - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    H61 can found at $60

    And those are not open box
  • duploxxx - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    just dropped today with more then 50% now aint that funny.... Reply
  • Broheim - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    it is still 31.99$ is it not? your move mr. fanboy... Reply
  • Targon - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    New vs. open's like comparing the price of a used car vs. a new car, it's not in the same market.

    Yes, a car that is three years old drops in value by 45-55 percent, so you can get a used car that is better in most respects for the same money, but who knows how the original owner treated the car, if there are problems, etc. Buying new vs. used....

    You will be able to get an open box AMD motherboard for super-cheap too, so where's your advantage once THAT happens?
  • maroon1 - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    Obviously, 4GB DDR3 1600MHz for $38 is going to have poor timing, and it is not going to performs as good as the one that anandtech tested
  • rockrr - Saturday, July 02, 2011 - link

    I’m not a technowiz like many of the AT readers are, (I read AR to learn.) I am a gamer and build my own machines. I agree that the ability to upgrade CPU and GPU separately is cost effective and allows for customizing for the best performance to suit your needs. Also it allows for recycling of components to upgrade other systems. Reply
  • Anato - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Couldn't agree more. There is feeling that no way AT could let AMD to be good at something. In mobile market there was this magical performance metric i7-2630QM+GTX460M (which obviously is not a competitor to Llano) on top of the char.

    And yes AMD is not as good as Intel at x86 but the whole point of Llano is different. AMD clearly chose to set more area for the GPU and make it affordable as a platform.

    In general would be better to compare what user can get with given price range. CPU-price is only 1/2 of the story, then there is motherboard and Intel chipped motherboards are generally more expensive.
  • prdola0 - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    That is entirely untrue now. It used to be the case but that time is now gone (it has been for a while, but you obviously missed it). It gets even better with H61. Reply
  • maroon1 - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    No one would buy a P67 unless you want to use discrete GPU

    A good quality H67 can be found as cheap as $75

    And H61 cost only $60
  • ganeshts - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    duploxxx, I agree wtih you on almost all the points.

    But, AMD has a good discrete GPU background now and taken in that context, the HTPC performance is not up to the mark.

    People don't care about post processing if they can't even play their camcorder videos. With a proper dGPU (targeted towards HTPCs), they can play and also get post processing done on the same clip. Why is the ESVP feature enabled by default when it doesn't work as intended?

    When I heard about the high end Llano, I expected it to fully replace the discrete HTPC GPU. Unfortunately, that is not happening (pending some magical driver updates?)
  • kev18 - Thursday, July 07, 2011 - link

    i second the comment made.....I have an AMD based HTPC already......i was excited to hear the new integrated CPU/GPU and may be it is time to upgrade..... but after hearing the problem playing files on hard drive, I think i willl wait for this to be more mature before buying........may be i should consider buying a 6xxx GPU card so that i can get HD-DTS Reply
  • Gigantopithecus - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Thanks for the review, Ganesh. I have a quick question: though the Antec Skeleton is a far less than ideal testbed for an HTPC, do you have any numbers or subjective impressions of the noisiness of the stock HSF?

    Also, from your reported power consumption numbers, your setup should run on an external power brick or picoPSU. The Antec PSU you used is a bottom-barrel model that's not even 80+, and during local HD file playback, is pulling ~10% of the PSU's rated output. That is, you're at the bottom end of the efficiency curve of a non-efficient PSU. It would be nice to see idealized or even more accurate power consumption numbers. Furthermore, I understand that you can only benchmark what you're actually sent, but as an HTPC builder, I'm having trouble thinking of a scenario when I would use the A8-3850 for HTPC duties...

    Finally, when you say "our expectations from the desktop Llano were much higher," well, what were you expecting? The issues with BRD and HD video file playback all sound like software, not hardware problems. Llano's not for sale on Newegg, so hopefully AMD will work out the kinks with its partners before or shortly after retail availability. I personally am extremely impressed by the power consumption numbers. Depending on the cost of the lower-end Llano SKUs and assuming they provide good enough computing (I can't wait for an HD 6410D APU to be tested), I'll likely cease building i3-based HTPCs.
  • ganeshts - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    We were provided an ATX motherboard for review with the 100W TDP processor. Our benchmarking setup was chosen with future reviews in mind too. We had no idea is mind how the power consumption numbers would play out before choosing the PSU.

    Today is the launch date for the processor. So, this review is just an inkling of how the 6550D (which is also there in the A8-3800 with 65W TDP) will perform currently for HTPC duties. It is targeted towards DIYers who want to build a HTPC right away (and our conclusion is, wait and watch for a few driver releases).
  • ckryan - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    There's lots of good stuff to do with a GPU that doesn't involve games; unfortunately, it seems like that is the only thing AMD had in mind for the Llano GPU. It's unfortunate, since running a discrete GPU with Llano in its desktop form just seems to make Llano pointless. In a laptop you at least get decent game performance at low screen resolutions.

    My enthusiasm for the future of Llano isn't diminished, but strangely, it seems that Llano makes a cheap Phenom II + dGPU seem like a much better idea than it was yesterday.

    Still, with some Bulldozer cores, improved GPU section, and some better drivers will go a long way to making Llano mainstream vs. a super-niche product for the desktop.
  • duploxxx - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    a super niche product for the desktop..... did you ever went to any large electronic shop? it's full of these kind of designs that you brand "niche". Check few OEM very soon they will all bulk this kind of Liano setups.... just like Brazos was a success this will also and already a major reason why intel introduces the 2105 just at release of Liano.... but the HD3000 over HD2000 remains crap. Reply
  • L. - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    You don't get it, the guy above is right !!!

    It's a super-niche product, for the biggest niche there is in the whole consumer market, normal people.

    Gee AMD ... bad idea really ;)
  • Ananke - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    :) Llano is exactly what the mass-consumer grade computer market uses and needs. That's 99.5% of the total market. The other negligible 0.5% is enthusiast market, where most of the AnandTech readers belong. Intel is still king there. Reply
  • therealnickdanger - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    "However, this leads to increased expectations like support for full post processing on Blu-ray videos."

    Did I misunderstand the comment?

    Assuming a faithful transfer from film (16mm/35mm/65/70mm) to Blu-ray (1080p24), there should be absolutely no reason to apply any post-processing to a Blu-ray. The worst transfers are those cases where the studio applied processing prior to encoding on the Blu-ray, and then there is no recourse to undo the effects. With only a handful of examples of low-budget or foreign films, there are no interlaced Blu-rays. And then, you would only need deinterlacing, not post-processing. Any artificial sharpening, coloring, or smoothing will ultimately degrade picture quality, not improve it. Outside of playing back Blu-rays in the proper color space and eliminating judder, not much else should be done to them.
  • ganeshts - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Sorry if I wasn't clear in this respect. I had also mentioned in the HQV section that we believe Blu-rays don't need post processing.

    First, there are a lot more interlaced Blu-rays than we would actually expect. Loads of nature documentaries and concerts are available in 1080i60. While the former ones are mostly VC-1, the latter Blu-rays are all H.264

    AMD's main stance with respect to not supporting 1080p60 camcorders was the fact that they want to target the Blu-ray market mainly. Now, 1080i60 is less demanding than 1080p60, and is also present in many camcorders which are already in the $200 - $300 range. If Llano GPUs don't support post processing on 1080i60 fully, I think it is a long way off before they start supporting 1080p60 decode along with post processing. So, the 'even for Blu-rays' comment is meant to stress that aspect rather than mean that we actually need the post processing for Blu-ray videos. (Local files were the main target of my post processing tests)
  • therealnickdanger - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Understood, thanks for taking the time to respond! Reply
  • StormyParis - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    for a very detailed review. I don't know much about HTPCs to start with, and I'm left a bit overwhelmed and confused, though.

    First, I really don't think the current Llano is meant to be used with a discrete graphics card. I think the whole point of the product, and the only situation in which it's worth coping with their underpowered CPU / higher power draw, is if I actually take advantage of their GPU.

    Second, I'm not really clear which issues are fixable in software, and which will stay. Actually, I'm not really clear which issues are important, and which aren't.

    Third, It'd be nice to have a hint about what lower clocks / core counts will do. I'd rather use 65W parts for small enclosures, and I have the feeling that wouldn't change much, but I'm not sure.
  • geniekid - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Sounds to me like, if they fixed their software issues, AMD would be the preferred platform for HTPC. Reply
  • ganeshts - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Yes, let us wait and watch for a couple of driver releases Reply
  • zondas30 - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    as i sed in other review it would be interesting to see if i could do that new crosfire trick with my good old ati hd 3870.
    but what i am realy interested is why cpu is combined with gpu, for me (and maby some other people) it would be beter to buy cheap powerfull cpu and not apu, my hd3870 is still powerfull to run alot of new games on max setings over 30 fps at 1440x900 resolution ant that is more then playable for me, so why integrate gpu in to cpu when what some people realy need is just cpu, mobo and ram? myself im looking for cpu and i dont care alot about gpu integrated in it and it would be beter if there wasnt any inside becouse in any case i wouldnt be able to use it.
  • Targon - Tuesday, July 05, 2011 - link

    If you look at the sub-$500 computers out there, this will make for a nice low-cost BASIC system that will do very well. The low-cost i3 based machines out there already have a lot of issues due to cheap components, so Llano will compete fairly well in that regard.

    AMD has been working on two major projects for a while now, with Fusion ALWAYS going for that mainstream system as the target. AMD has also been working on an all new CPU core design to help keep AMD competitive, even if not taking the performance crown. Bulldozer, going up to an eight-core 3.8GHz at launch will be something for the enthusiast crowd to watch and wait for, since multithreaded software designs are getting more common.

    Once we see Bulldozer released, AMD will release a new generation of Fusion processors with the new CPU core design, and with an updated GPU as well. That is when Fusion will really start to play out.

    Think about it, what we are seeing here is something for your mainstream audience, the "good stuff" is going to take a bit longer.
  • kenyee - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    That's what I'm more interested in for an HTPC.

    I'm actually surprised the A8 can do 3D Bluray playback because the Sandy Bridge definitely doesn't AFAIK.
    Quicksync is useful for trancoding (e.g., get rid of commercials, and compress the HDTV s stream into a .avi or mpeg4 file). The A8 has enough processors for CUDA support probably so in theory they could have added this...
  • ganeshts - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Let us first get Blu-ray playback working in Linux :) AFAIK, the MakeMKV running in the background route is the only one, and even that doesn't give us Blu-ray menus. 3D on Linux will come much later.

    SNB can also do 3D BR with no issues.

    Anand has covered transcoding performance (Intel beats out AMD there) in his desktop review.
  • kenyee - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Hate the MakeMKV hack, but if that hack gets Bluray 3D, that's ok with me :-)

    Didn't know SNB could do 3D BR...thought it was missing some hardware decode accelerators for 3D. Quicksync is definitely a lot faster than anything out there right now...was just hoping AMD had some tricks in the GPU that we missed...
  • lestr - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    A good, honest review as always. The grafting process began with the Hudson E350, is now into phase II and only needs Bulldozing to completion. Yeah, I wish it was here today, too, but it isn't. Remember, this is a new animal we're dealing with here. Ain't hardly nuthin' perfect on the first try. Infidel proved that in January, created the H and P's and sort of cured those ailments with the Z all the while holding the X79 over your heads as 1156 went EOL... 1366 to follow shortly? Humm.. does that mean you're gonna be 1 DIMM short when you upgrade?

    To top it all off AMD has eliminated the 6450 for this chipset, made the 6570 a questionable option with hybrid which pushes up the a new entry level upgrade card and it probably works in hybrid, too. When you think about it the 3800 series only has 320 SP's and ran at 650... sucked down a pot load of amps while everyone cried about fan noise and temps. That was a short 4 years ago. Sure they have a few kinks to iron out but we're dealing with tech that didn't exist back then, too. What's to argue about?

    We're told the eventual result will add GPU power to augment CPU power all neatly tied together underneath that OLD but great cooler. That's what the big deal is. It's getting a new architecture while they iron out the kinks with this generation. As far as integration goes, unless you have an i5-7-K model you're paying for graphics you really don't want in the first place which means a discrete card to even THINK about serious gaming then you're gonna fork over another couple of hundred anyway and this APU only lightens your wallet by $130 or so which isn't much. Make for a great HTPC..

    Hopefully the new mainstream buyers will go nuts over it. Serious upgraders are gonna wait. It's a great start.. Let's see where it leads.
  • AnandThenMan - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    After reading 4 or 5 other reviews, it's pretty easy to see that Anandtech has gone out of their way to minimize the virtues of Llano. So much information was left out, and the conclusions are very muted compared to other reviews. I just read the and got a much better picture of the capabilities, features, and performance.

    I hate to say it, but Anandtech is continuing to prove they are very biased against AMD, a real shame.
  • ganeshts - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    I am quite sorry you feel that way.

    In this piece, I have gone to great lengths to indicate how AMD's deinterlacing performance is much better than Intel's. So, there is actually no bias against AMD there.

    When we do a review, there is no point in saying that everything works. For example, HD audio bitstreaming works without issues in all current day HTPC (i)GPUs, and so, there is no point in mentioning it.

    My duty as a reviewer is to find faults (be it in Intel based systems or be it in AMD or NVIDIA ones) and bring it to the forefront so that the vendor can resolve them (eventually beneficial to the consumers). We do it irrespective of the vendor.
  • AnandThenMan - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    I am not the only one who is disappointed with the reviews here.
  • dragonsqrrl - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    Okay... an AMD fanboy group therapy session... great.

    So because the conclusions of this review don't meet your 'agenda', the author must be biased and bought out by Intel or Nvidia. Unless every single available AMD option is wholeheartedly recommended, the reviewers are biased and bought out by Intel or Nvidia. I've heard it countless times in countless comments sections in both Anandtech and Tom's Hardware reviews. And this is by no means an exaggeration of your typical fanboy argument. There could be five positive reviews in a row of AMD products, followed by full-hearted approval and praise by the hardline AMD crowd. But the moment a flaw is pointed out, a strength under emphasized, or an AMD product failing to gain an unquestioned recommendation, and these same people start accusing the authors of bias and favoritism. Accusations start flying out from, ironically, some of the most blatantly biased and one-sided individuals I've ever seen.

    Tom's couldn't bring themselves to recommend the HD6990, but instead recommended Xfire HD6970's as a superior alternative, and there was a huge uproar (unsurprisingly). Accusations of Nvidia favoritism, entirely baseless except for the fact that the reviewer had recommended one AMD product over another, were relentlessly thrown about until some of the more level headed readers dropped in to point out some rather obvious logical failings in their arguments.

    Just recently, Tom's did a system builders guide that incorporated an i3-2100, and... well, I think you know what happened. I'm not kidding, some seriously ill thought-out rage comments directed at the author of the article, not unlike some of the comments I've observed here, and in the HD6990 review, and in countless other reviews with similarly ambiguous conclusions regarding an AMD product. I think I'm sensing a trend. All these accusations of Intel favoritism despite the fact that Tom's had built an AMD based system in every single builders guide since 2009!

    The principle observation I've made is that AMD has some of the most loyal, and at times blatantly unreasonable fan-boys in existence. But honestly, if some of you guys truly believe sites like Anandtech and Tom's are conspiring with Intel to consistently dish out negative reviews of AMD products, then why don't you do everyone a favor and just move to SemiAccurate. You'll probably be far more satisfied their reviews and recommendations.
  • just4U - Saturday, July 02, 2011 - link

    I've always found AMD fans to be a little more reasonable then their Intel / Nvidia counterparts. Simple reason being AMD products don't normally hit home runs with enthusiasts (these days) so their not walking around puffing out their chests talking about their l33t products. Reply
  • Jaybus - Wednesday, July 06, 2011 - link

    Nonsense. The principle fault that AT points out is that the drivers are half baked. That is certainly not AT's fault, nor is it an unfair assessment. The fact is, I take all of the reviews with a grain of salt, sinec it is impossible to properly review the platform with such bad drivers. Reply
  • anikhtos - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    well both amd and intel have seen the intergrate cpu - gpu thing complelty wrong.
    the e-350 made by amd is a right product a decent low power machine dedicated for htpc or for a system needed less wattage thus c-50 can come into paly when watt is into account.

    liano!?!?!?! i3 with gpu
    what a joke.
    first you make the cpu-gpu compo to draw enought power to too much power thus needing a good cooling system thus passive cooling is no longer an option thus htpc is at question.

    the compromise of the cpu-gpu perfomanse is leaving always someone complaining i need more cpu i need more gpu.
    no indepentent upgrade available.
    and sorry for the 100 watt tdp of the a8 there are tons better solutions even from amd side
    athlonII x4 620e 45 watt or phenomII x4 915e at 65 watt leaving room for a discrete card as a 5570 which will kick any integrade gpu with blind fold.
    as long you can not provide any decent cpu-gpu combo at least they could have focused at the tdp lowering the cpu and gpu cababilities for a 20-25 watt system. the integrate gpu should always remain at a minimum lets say playing blue ray or a little more. thus allowing to build a system cheper now and upgrading to a single discrete card later. (as we used to do with intergrate gpu on mobo i bught my new system with an intergrade gpu on modo and 6 months later i bought the gpu)

    trying to make a killing combo is a wate of silicon. it wont work.
    and thus liano is a fail product too much tdp too little at anything
  • ET - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    What I'd like to see is a media PC with the mobile Llano. 35W is low enough, especially coupled with the low idle power draw (which even the 100W llano has). I think that an HTPC that's small but capable of some gaming (WoW and the like) would be an attractive machine.

    It would be interesting to do some undervolting and underclocking of a 100W Llano and see what kind of power draw and performance can be achieved. And remember that 65W desktop Llano is also planned to appear.

    By the way, I don't think that Llano is a failed product. It may not be an enthusiast product, but it's a good product for OEM's. I also think that once people will start tweaking it they'll find it a good product for their HTPC needs, and it could get a following amongst enthusiasts.
  • Targon - Tuesday, July 05, 2011 - link

    The joke is on you then, because you have missed the whole point of WHY these types of products are even offered. How many mainstream consumers have ever opened their computer case to even add more RAM? It's a fairly low percentage of the overall market that is concerned with the exact amount of power required here or there. Many also don't care about battery life since they will be on a desktop system, NOT a laptop, and many with laptops leave them plugged in all the time anyway.

    Now, the old system with a CPU and graphics integrated on the motherboard. If you measure the total power draw on the old systems compared to Llano, you are looking at the same or less power draw HERE, yet with much better graphics power. Can you compare a Radeon 4200 integrated video based machine to Llano and say that the older generation is better in any way?

    Llano is a first generation Fusion part, and if you go out and buy one of these for $400 in a computer tower, can you REALLY complain about what you get? It will be a much better machine than any i3 based machine at that price point, so why do you have a problem with that?
  • garagisti - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Dear Ganesh,

    You're so quick to complain about the shortcomings of the Llano, which to be fair are there. However, i failed to see you mention 24-bit hd audio bit-streaming through HDMI on the Llano. Oh, does Intel support that? Nope, there is no mention of that? Yes, you did mention that you will test audio solutions later. But why not publish this review a little later, more complete, where you could also speak about shortcomings of an Intel solution. Or, is that a no-no at Intel-tech, sorry, old habit, Anandtech.

    In short, my issue is with you guys siding up with one team so much, always... it's getting old. Anandtech i used to read some years ago, was more thorough than this, and dare i say, more balanced in concluding. I mean would it really kill you to say that Llano makes for a better HTPC solution than Intel's chippery? That is, as long as you're going with the igp.
  • ganeshts - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    I don't find info anywhere that Intel doesn't support 24-bit HD audio bitstreaming. Any links to back up your claim? My testbed doesn't report the audio bitdepth (Onkyo 606), but you have piqued my interest, and I will definitely report the findings (if it doesn't bitstream) in my next HTPC review (if it uses SNB graphics)

    Technical writers have to deal with NDAs and launch dates. If I test thoroughly and report after a month or so, the coverage for the platform in the media dies down. We have to strike a balance between having a thorough review and one which touches upon most of the essential aspects at launch time. (You can see on the AVSForum Llano thread that users wanted a review as soon as the NDA lifted). You can also blame the half-baked nature of the BIOS and AMD drivers for us not being able to run all the tests before the NDA lift.

    In any case, we will also be reviewing HTPC systems based on the Llano chips in the future. By that time drivers also get mature and we will be able to do a more thorough review (and note if any of the issues we mentioned in this review gets resolved)

    We trust our readers to analyze the conclusions and make their own inference. Will I use the Llano in my own HTPC? No, because I have a 1080p60 camcorder whose videos play back perfectly on SNB and even AMD 6570 / GT 430 based systems. But, I can't speak for everyone. Our conclusions present the pros and cons, and unless a platform wins hands down, we don't say one thing is better than the other. If you observe, we didn't say that Intel's IGP is better for HTPCs, right?
  • garagisti - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    Do you sincerely believe it is a tie? From HTPC perspective... HQV gives the picture quality test to Llano... HD Audio support is something i'd think one would investigate into, as it is a HTPC review.

    This is where the rub is... Llano is so many things to so many people, and reviewers have may be a responsibility of educating people. It allows you to use it for HTPC purposes, also rudimentary gaming at 720p, which i3 doesn't do well, and it doesn't do DX11 at all. Imagine a budget buyer, back in India (psst, i'm an Indian too), this piece of hardware must be like a wet dream. I know i had to damned upgrade my system when HD first arrived on the scene, and i didn't want to watch anything but HD. DVD's weren't good enough anymore really, they haven't been for a long time. You know, i bought a C2D 6750, upgrading from an AMD 3000+ but that wasn't good enough for HD playback. System played games fine on low-medium coupled with a 7600 but couldn't play media. On the other hand, there are a lot of people i know, who could have used a better graphic part, saving may be money on cpu-mobo. Now this is where you are supposed to be an educator and may be guide people.

    Consider this, a lot of people around the world will only have one system, so there is your guidance as a reviewer with respect to that is very very crucial.
  • Regenweald - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    What you want will never happen. Anywhere that Intel looks bad is: "not a part of the test bench" that's why in the HQV testing, Llano doesn't score higer, no, Intel has caught up to the competition. Um, go intel ? Reply
  • ganeshts - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    From 133 to 173 is a much bigger jump for the SNB from the Clarkdale compared to the ~169 to ~184 achieved by the 6550D (compared to the 5570).

    So, who is catching up now?

    I don't think I can even count the number of instances in the review where I have said that the Llano surpasses the SNB in terms of video post processing quality.

    Actually, you guys should take a look at our Intel based system reviews. We are equally, if not more, scathing on the Intel's GPU team for not catering to the HTPC enthusiasts' requests.
  • Regenweald - Sunday, July 03, 2011 - link

    Have to disagree with you here, technology isn't about 'points for effort' but raw performance. the Stars IPC is abysmal in comparison to SB, call it as such. In the same way In HTPC as well as 3D performance, Intel IGPs are still scraping the bottom of the barrel in comparison to the A-Series, call it as such. Which consumer buys second best because 'they're really trying' ?
    Lower power consumption, better performance A-Series comes out on top this time. It's ok to say it :)
  • garagisti - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    Also, if you didn't find any links saying Intel supports 7.1 channel 24-bit hd audio bit-streaming over hdmi, you could have mentioned it in the review. I don't see Intel claiming it. AMD DOES feature that in their graphic parts with HD68xx series and above. I don't know if Llano features it or not, but i'd like to find out given this is a HTPC benchmark. Reply
  • Targon - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    And just think about prices when HP starts releasing low-end systems with Llano. Most of us look at system prices that START at $500 and go up from there, while most end users look at the $500 mark as being near the top of what they want to spend and then go down from there.

    If this becomes the $400 machine, doesn't that make for a MUCH better purchase than a $500 i3 system that has similar performance numbers?
  • ganeshts - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    Just a small observation that many users will be happy to invest the extra ~$100 to make sure that they can play back their $1000 1080p60 camcorder's clips.

    I wrote this in another comment, but I will repeat: The choice depends on what the end user wants to do with the system.
  • Regenweald - Sunday, July 03, 2011 - link

    I'd argue that the person buying the $1000 camcorder is not looking for a sub $500 PC. For the person buying the Flip or Sanyo Xacti sub $300, Llano is their territory. Reply
  • ganeshts - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    HQV testing : When the picture quality doesn't materialise for local files / local file playback has more issues with respect to higher GPU load, do you want us to recommend the system ?

    I respect the intelligence of the readers to the extent that they identify what is right and wrong with the hardware from what is presented.

    Again, we reiterate : If you do even a bit of gaming on your PC, the Llano is a much much better bet than Intel. When it comes to HTPCs, though, take a hard look at what it does and what it doesn't. If you don't care about 1080p60 camcorder clips, then the Llano is a better choice for its 'proper' support of 23.976 Hz, and better deinterlacing capability. On the other hand, if all you play is downloaded MKVs which are progressive in nature, you will be happy with the higher CPU power provided by Intel since its iGPU is good enough in THAT scenario. All these facts are presented in the review, and it is up to the reader to see whether the pros outweigh the cons in HIS particular scenario.

    As for HD audio bitstreaming, LAV Splitter + LAV Audio Decoder bitstreamed all the HD audio codecs to the AVR correctly. Proper bitstreaming support is a given in systems nowadays. In today's systems, It only deserves mention if something doesn't work. Also, I looked into AVSForum threads talking about 24-bit TrueHD streams, and many of the posters had SNB systems. Not one of them complained about any issues with HD audio bitstreaming of that content.
  • swaaye - Thursday, June 30, 2011 - link

    Thanks for the thorough review. It gives a good overview of Lllano's virtues for video playback. Hopefully they clean up the software quickly. It's particularly annoying to see the Enforce Smooth Playback option causing problems when it has been in their drivers for year(s) now. Reply
  • Targon - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    That 32nm process node has been a long time coming from AMD, hasn't it? Reply
  • redisnidma - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    I'm sorry if I'm about to hurt some feelings here, but I also agree with the rest of the guys in regards to the bias in Anandtech reviews. This one about Llano is no exception.

    Ganesh is quick to point out that Llano doesn't offer transcoding features like Intel's Quicksync, even though he doesn't mentions that the quality output of quicksync is CRAP; but when it comes to promote a handy feature like SteadyVideo (which llano supports), he's quick to shout out to the public about the negative aspects of it.

    These guys, (Anand and the bunch) are quick to criticize Llano's CPU and make a whole fuzz about it, but on the other hand they dare to call Sandybridge's iGPU as "average" and "OK" which in reality is total crap.

    This site is unbelievable, but anyhow, it's good to know that people are noticing it.
  • ganeshts - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    I am not a big fan of QuickSync myself (take a look at my observations in the article).

    IIRC, Anand's review indicated that QuickSync's output quality was much better than the GPU based encoding techniques promoted by NVIDIA. And the ATI Stream technology seemed to generate something close to the QuickSync quality, albeit with a much lower performance.

    Basically, I consider QuickSync useless unless we can get the sort of quality that proper options to x264 can provide.
  • formulav8 - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    I'm sorry but there are to many people complaining about your review and I doubt they are all AMD fannys. Maybe, just maybe the problem is you and your reviews? Or is it people are just all AMD fanboys? and couldn't have anything to do with you?

    Although I personally am not into the bias thing with you, you absolutely did NOT critque that Intel stuff near as much as you did AMD's. You need to go back and actually Expose Intels flaws. Not hide them or downplay them in a quote or something.

    In the end though, your article was way below many of the other Top 3 or 4 sites. Not because of being biased, but just the overall review is subpar imo. You do have alot of potential though :)
  • dragonsqrrl - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    No, I'd say the source of pretty much all the accusations of bias and favoritism following this review has been AMD fanboyism. Reply
  • cjs150 - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    That at least up til now is what I have thought about each new HTPC review.

    Sadly this seems to be one step forward and at best at least one and a half steps back.

    The AMD A8 issues identified in the review show that, once again, AMD is launching a half tested product.

    There seems to be at least 2 or 3 different HTPC markets.

    I want something that sits in the main room and plays everything properly, with a bit of internet browsing on top. Game playing is something I leave to the main rig. Despite that, some game playing even if limited to older games would be nice.

    Other people want something that is much more powerful because they want serious game playing as well as proper HTPC work. That is not a criticsm of them, they have different priorities.

    Here are my thoughts

    1. AMD, INTEL, NVIDIA: dropped frames are totally unacceptable. I do not care if it one frame every 1000 frames or every 10,000 frames. The Blu ray playback rates are standard, it is the computer industry fault and no one elses if you cannot comply with the standard.

    2. INTEL (particularly): Audio, it may come as a suprise but people watch films with the sound on! Many of us have reasonable high end AV rigs playing 5:1 (or better), I rather like my AV rig where I simply plug an HDMI cable into Blu ray player and the other end into the AV receiver and get top quality pictures AND 5:1 sound. If you want to be in the HTPC market then you have to offer the same option (I am just wating for replies from all the audiophiles who will tell me that using the HDMI cable this way is sub-optimal - maybe it is but my ears are not good enough to tell the difference and I like the simplicity of fewer cables)

    3. SILENCE: would be nice. No small noisy fans

    Otherwise nice review
  • jabber - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    Their importance is waning in terms of reviews for CPUs and ram etc. I dont need to know how fast a chip is nowadays. Unless I want to run mega gaming resolutions or spend all day transcoding, anything off the shelf will do. I now laugh if I see a DDR3 ram roundup review and roll my eyes at the waste of lifetime it took to create.

    7-8 years ago you had to give a little thought to a build. I'd spend a couple of weeks going over the reviews etc. Nowadays I spend about 30 minutes and just use the retail sites.

    "That will do (click) that will do (click) that will do (click)!" Proce now counts for morw than out right performance. I do not need Intel's fastest CPU. I don't even need their second or third.....

    As far as I am concerned going forward these Llano cpus will be going into quite a lot of builds for my customers. Not Intels.
  • just4U - Saturday, July 02, 2011 - link

    Ram drives me crazy... even today. I'd say those reviews are still warranted. Reply
  • rachotilko - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    What a triumphant boasts were made of Bobcat & Bulldozer. The lauch of chips have been postponed several times, only to reveal that in its core the Bobcat is still the same Sledgehammer Opteron of 2003. It took AMD 3 years to shrink the Phenom II to 32 nm and pair it with GPU (that I admitt is very decent). What a disgrace ! Reply
  • jabber - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    And that means what to Joe Average User?

    Absolutely nothing.
  • lestr - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    Hey Ganesh,

    Sorry you're taking so much heat. I appreciate your reviews because you DO point out shortcomings. I recall MANY, MANY reviews where Gary and Anand counted over 20 BIOS revisions they insisted upon in order to get a board remotely functional. (X58?) Unlike many of the Infidel fanboys here I don't have a photographic memory of every word in every Infidel review... and if they DID... they'd recall the many problems Anand encountered with Infidel chipsets, too.

    It has been a few months since the introductiion of the 1155. Have they ALL forgotten how bitterly everyone complained that you couldn't OC the CPU on one board and that you couldn't OC the iGP on another? Oh, that's because Intel wanted to soak the market THEN give them "Z" board they'd rather have had... makes sense now.. Why did they cut / limit the # of PCIe lanes? A VERY frequent comment was the only chip to get was the K series.. Talk about rabid dogs. No, they forget about all that. They forget about the extremely limited lifespan of the 1156 line all together? Did they even forget about the recent chip failure? I give credit where it's due and Intel handled that wonderfully while EVERYONE complained about having to wait and return their boards. Talk about the blind leading the deaf and dumb!!.. What ever Infidel does is ok by them regardless of how deeply they greedily dig into your pockets. They make you pay for each and every incremental improvement many of which AMD includes as native. SATA 6, USB 3 and NOW they're complaining that the HD6550D CF capable chip isn't good enough in a few limited areas? How long have people been waiting for Infidel to fix the 23.997 glitch?

    They'll sit and criticize AMD for purchasing ATI and in the next breath say the only way Infidel can fix their graphics is if they BUY NVidia? It's simply another example of near-sighted bigotry by self-assessed elitists.

    It would be nice if, for a change, the readers could think... some of them need to learn to spell, too! Ok Anand has discovered another glitch. They Published it while other reviewers passed over it. They - you - are responsible for getting a lot of glitches fixed on BOTH sides. No, they don't give you guys enough credit for that. I have to believe that the mfr's respect your openness and honesty and know you can't be bought or bribed. Anand is an advocate for the people.

    I own both brands of systems. I prefer AMD because they are more feature rich for the buck. Maybe they aren't as fast.. We're reaching a point of diminishing returns.. "DAMN! I had to wait and blink my eyes twice for the screen to change." I remember an 8088 costing 3 grand. No, it isn't a perfect world. It never will be. I happen to believe you're just as critical, if not more so with Intel on some of the products they've produced in the last few years. They're so much bigger and they should know better. I know some people won't change their opinions and there is always going to be bias on both sides. You're right, they do need to go back and read some of your Intel reviews.

    No, this readership isn't comprised of the average John or Jane Doe. They don't even know it exists. I was one of them about 5 years ago. Big box off the shelf crap forced me to seek alternatives. After extensively exploring more sites than I an count I selected Anand as my primary go-to source because you DO tell it like it is not because you sweep things under the rug. Keep pissing people off - isn't that the job of a good journalist? Another good, honest review. Thanks...

    Now.. about that G.Skill contest... if I "happen" to win... well.. let's just call that a coincidence, ok? :)~`
  • lestr - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    From another site 7/1/11

    AMD's launch of two Llano A-series desktop APUs yesterday comes a little over two weeks after the CPU/GPU maker made available its Catalyst 11.6 driver package. For whatever reason, AMD chose not to bake in support for its then soon-to-be-released A8-3850 and A6-3650 APUs, but don't despair, there's a hotfix available if you plan on running one of these chips.

    The AMD Catalyst 11.6a hotfix also adds support for the A8-3800 with Radeon HD 6550D (same as the A8-3850) and A6-3600 with Radeon HD 6530D (same as the A6-3650). Otherwise, there isn't anything new in this hotfix.

    In case you missed it, the Catalyst 11.6 drivers promise performance gains in a handful of titles, including Crysis, F1 2010, Far Cry 2, HAWX, and the Unigine Open GL tests. It also adds a few new features, such as Steady Video, Image Stabilization brought to you by YouTube, and decode acceleration of MPEG-4 part 2 content in Microsoft video player applications (through MFT support) for all Radeon HD 6000 cards.
  • ganeshts - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    Yes, we are aware of this. The 8.862 RC1 driver release we used has all the above features inbuilt. Basically, you can say that we tested with the hotfix Cat 11.6a. Reply
  • Galcobar - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    Well, if Anandtech is so deeply in Intel's pocket, Intel might want their money back if the corporation were to read all the accusations of bias against Intel SSDs when Anandtech reviews an OCZ drive and concludes it's faster if less reliable.

    Well, as my journalism profs said, if everyone's angry at you, you're doing your job.
  • Musafir_86 - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    Hi Ganesh,

    -Thanks for the article. As per your reply to me in the preceding article (by Anand), besides video quality, where are the comparison for gaming? Or am I wrong to expect image quality (IQ) comparison for 3D games here?

    Thanks again.
  • ganeshts - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    I misunderstood your original request for IQ testing. I thought it was for video playback.

    As for 3D games, I am not the right person since I don't play any games at all (except for running benchmarks). Let me ping a few people in our team and see if we can get that done and posted in a follow-up.
  • Musafir_86 - Friday, July 01, 2011 - link

    -Okay, I will be waiting for it then. :D

  • jabber - Saturday, July 02, 2011 - link

    A tip re. integrated graphics. All the PCs and laptops I get in with such setups all have The Sims installed.

    Can we have a Sims benchmark. Just saying as it would actually be a benchmark relevant to folks that actually use such machines.

    I dont need to know it will only do 6fps with Crysis. I kinda know that.
  • mindbomb - Saturday, July 02, 2011 - link

    i think the bug you are experiencing is related to the evr cp renderer. If you use an updated build, this should go away. Reply
  • ganeshts - Saturday, July 02, 2011 - link

    Yes, I did find that on the MPC-HC IRC channel. But, the difference between BD-ISO and M2TS using TMT itself remains unexplained. The driver does lots of 'invisible' post processing when using EVR, so there is no reason why AMD didn't do that in this case. Reply
  • puretech - Saturday, July 02, 2011 - link

    I truly hope that software developers takes the Fusion platform at this CPU performance level seriously. For many years now higher performance CPUs has not been needed by 99.5% of the consumers. It's not even possible anymore to to get the kids of today to understand what actually was possible to do already with a 486 based system 20 years ago, and the major problems even back then were slow disk I/O and poor graphics performance, not the CPU itself. Since then software development has only been for the highest CPU performance leading to sloppy programming and non-existent optimization, forcing people to upgrade the hardware to stay on "contemporary" operating systems. This review says more about the operating system and the application developers than the Fusion platform. Reply
  • ganeshts - Saturday, July 02, 2011 - link

    I think the problem is more with the drivers rather than the Fusion GPU itself. But, that said, the drivers are themselves a part of the Fusion platform. Reply
  • Dobs - Saturday, July 09, 2011 - link

    Since every other site is finding these hum with more memory & bandwidth, please retest with 8GB of 1866 Ram.
    And can the default GFX memory of 512 MB be increased to 1024 or 2048? What happens to the benchmarks then?

  • patsfan - Sunday, July 10, 2011 - link

    I have read, off and on for the last 7 years or so articles on Anandtech, however, the ONLY reason I come here anymore is the same reason I look at CNN from time to time. For a good laugh. What started off as a fairly serious website for reviews on all things peripheral, has now turned into an INTEL propaganda machine. Seriously, when you look at all the ads, all you see is INTEL, INTEL, INTEL. Anand, if you stepped back and looked at your website as it gets pulled up, you would see what we see, a website that is no longer objective, between Intel, and Crapple you've apparently lost your objective way. I look at the obvious, AMD is the underdog, and I'll pick the underdog every time, and as far as Apple goes, it's a hell of a marketing machine, but as far as equipment goes???? The I-phone was great 4 years ago, today, it is mediocre at best, and if you're into power computing, Apple has absolutely NO compelling entry. Sadly, I resign myself to the fact that this website no longer provides me with any stimulating information, other than being an Intel/Crapple bully pulpit........ Oh well Reply
  • qqgoodhao - Sunday, July 17, 2011 - link

    Women's fashion, men's personality + shoes

    Travel bagthat eye-catching jacket + super pack free shipping
  • zgoodbbb - Wednesday, July 20, 2011 - link

    Women's fashion, men's personality + shoes

    Travel bagthat eye-catching jacket + super pack free shipping
  • morohmoroh - Friday, July 22, 2011 - link

    puting northbrigde inside core CPU is wonderfull in age of 32 NM but than ....that GPU radeon is still shared ram outside the processor , and NB still have to hop in out to transfer data in and out from the socket .....and it shared too with other kinda data for system stored at ram socket ddr3

    discreet VGA have dedicated RAM and some indenpendet core CPU too like in Nvidia , i wondering GDDR5 VS DDR3 , which one is fastes speedt?........comboing VGA is another idea but all that handle via software not at hardware it self.... so far see there is just another decoder for movies aka films format

    the northbridge itself inside or outside core CPU will stressing alot hardwork to transforming coming in out data from external socket RAM....and i think it will produce more heat itself at the core

    how can NB self handle 64 Gigs? i read that phenom x6 are gonna be very hot to handle 16 Gigs

    intel create DMI to handle data boost at Mobos ram pci etc ...and QPI for inner core data boost...

    well i not preety sure 32 Nm liano architecture are work fines in real wordl practically electron flows handling data , speed etc.....and mobo compability to manage the potential of it

    pushing external DDR3 speed to act like GDDR5 for integrated VGA on same dies core ?

    and i dont really care about i3 etc with VGA too i think its just another variaton for marketing thats all..seem nothing significant inovation about nano tech age can do more beyond that...

    maybe doctor OCt gonna say "the power of the sun in palm of my hand "LOL


Log in

Don't have an account? Sign up now